Sex Education

Most kids are always going to have an idea of what it is. Even if they don't, they're generally going to know it's a touchy subject. When I was 6 years old, I did not know everything the other 6 year olds knew. I was not stupid or sheltered, but I did live in a Christian home, and I just didn't see the things on TV and in magazines that they did. It wasn't in our home, so I wasn't exposed to it. And I was too young at that point to learn about it at school.

I'll never forget that in 1st grade we had to take a standardized test. The teacher was explaining what each of the sections meant, and she proceeded to explain the box that said: Sex - M, F. Of course most of the kids said, "Oooohhhh!" or giggled hysterically, to which the teacher said, "Alright now, be serious." We were 6 years old! Myself, I didn't know that was funny. To me, it simply meant gender. By the time I was 12, I had things pretty much figured out, and of course you learn more as you get older. But my point is that at 6 years old these kids already had an idea. And this was 15 years ago. They're learning about it somewhere, somehow. The schools don't need to help that along. The children are far too young. Perhaps by 11-12, that's possible. But 6 years old? They haven't even learned to read yet, for crying out loud. Neutral

My parents never did "have that talk" with me. I'm not totally sure why, but they didn't. And I managed to find out other ways. Never on purpose, necessarily, but it happens. Human beings aren't stupid. To think that they won't find out if they aren't "educated" about it is purely idiotic. So why explain it in great detail before they're even old enough to comprehend it? They hear things, they learn things. But that is far too young to understand the concept completely. So I think it needs to be saved until they're old enough to truly wonder what it's all about, and it's not just something they're "not supposed to talk about". And I don't think that's until they're at least 10. Which we're talking about 5th grade there, like everyone's been saying.

Still, though, I agree that it's the parents' responsibility, not the schools'. However, if the schools are going to teach it, they need to teach that it's wrong. No, they just teach, "Be safe." I disagree! If you just tell a kid to, "Be safe", of course they're going to go for it! When no one's telling them they're wrong anymore, it just degrades quicker and quicker! If the 16 year olds can do it, why can't the younger ones? What's with all these 12 year olds having sex? That's ridiculous! Most girls aren't even old enough at that point, biologically, but there they are. Shocked

Let me try to shut up by putting it this way: Kids in the past, say the 50s, were just as bad as kids now. They snuck around and did things they weren't supposed to. It wasn't a clean society where everyone was good. It just put on a good front. But you know what the difference was? It was publicly wrong for these kids to go out and have sex when they weren't married. Did that totally stop them? Of course not! But did you see the numbers of kids having sex out of wedlock that you do now? Did you see the number of pregnancies in young girls that you see now? Not even! So what was the difference? Kids were still going to be kids, but because it was taught that it was wrong, and publicly frowned upon, the problem did not get out of control.

When you teach something like it's no big deal, like...riding your bicycle, for example, where's the harm in it? Everyone's going to do it. There's nothing stopping them. Why should a first date stop with a kiss? What's wrong with going ahead and having sex? I mean, they've been told about it since they were 6 years old. So why not? People are going to be more careful and responsible when the subject is taught as a touchy subject. By just treating it as another no big deal thing we need to learn in life (early in life), it becomes just another subject. "History 101, Art 101, Math 101, Sex 101..."

So...teach it, fine. But quit saying, "Go ahead. Have sex. Just be sure to be safe!" Neutral

_________________

"It's not about the legacy you leave, it's about the life you live." ~Mara Jade Skywalker

While I certainly respect the idea of not teaching sex ed as "go ahead and have sex so long as its safe" I'm not so sure about teaching it as wrong either. For starters I think teaching right from wrong in the broad sense here should be left up to the parents and the parents alone. There are way too many degrees of right/wrong in this area to satisfy everyone.

I agree one big problem is that we've lost a concept of it being wrong at all, resulting in "friends with benefits" and such but at the same time I think that if schools reacted by making a blanket "its wrong" in sex ed it might not solve anything because it would become a forbidden fruit sort of thing.

Overall I think that the biggest problem with the sex ed isn't a failure of sex ed per se so much as it is the lack of any concept of chivalry or honor not being there to back up any lessons. Lets face it if a person isn't taught to act with honor it won't matter what is taut in sex ed.

In this regard I disagree that in the 50s it wasn't as big a problem because it was seen as wrong. I think the reason it wasn't a problem was because if guys had treated girls the way they do now (namely just wanting to have sex for the heck of it) they would have been significantly breaching the code of chivalry that was expected of them and gotten reputations as dishonorable. That of course would have resulted in very few girls having anything to do with them. Of course girls also had a certain behavior expected of them that went hand in hand with the chivalry/honor expected of guys.

This concept of chivalry/honor is all based on my observations while in college. I had a tendency of tipping my hat or touching my hand to the brim when saying goodbye to my friends who were girls and one of them once made a remark on how that was old fashioned but a nice gesture. If such a simple sign of respect is considered unusual enough to merit a comment why expect people to show restraint with sex?
_________________

You have a very good point, Salaris. I can certainly see that being a reason. And of course I was just spouting things off due to my impression of the era (and I certainly wasn't there). So that's very interesting. I hadn't thought of it that way.

And you know, I do agree that it's difficult to teach that sex would be wrong. I am, of course, basing that on my belief as a Christian. But I don't suppose it's right of me to enforce that belief on everyone else. Sometimes I just get carried away ranting about what I believe. So it's nice to have a differing opinion. I definitely appreciate that. Smile

_________________

"It's not about the legacy you leave, it's about the life you live." ~Mara Jade Skywalker

Chivalry rocks. Cool

_________________

Where sky and water meet,
Where the waves grow sweet,
Doubt not, Reepicheep,
To find all you seek,
There is the utter east.

Thank you. I'd never really thought of that era your way Mara, so thank you for that. My parents who were teenagers in that era always focused on the more secular aspects of proper behavior back then when they raised me (they had me late in life). I'm sure though that the reality is probably a combination of our two interpretations.

I really appreciate that your open to hearing other opinions and not force your views on anyone. Hopefully with attitudes like that society can work out a compromise on how to better do sex ed that is agreeable to everyone.

Slightly off track from sex ed but related:

I was recently talking with my father about music then and now. It occurred to me that most of the songs on the radio most songs that are "romantic" tend to focus on the more sensual aspects of romance. Comparing that to songs by Frank Sinatra or Bing Crosby it seemed like the number of songs focusing on the sensual parts of romance were in the minority and focused more on the non-sexual emotions of romance (does that make sense?). At any rate we had a rather interesting debate on whether the lack of songs focusing on those non-sexual emotions might be one of the reasons there is this whole issue with sex in modern society.
_________________

Turn off the Frank Sinatra and put on some Chuck Berry. You'll get a different message Laughing

_________________

Music is soooo shallow nowadays (well mostly, there's still my favourites Smile

).

It depresses me for the future because relationships seem to be based mostly on the sensual aspects and I can't see how they'll last. Sad

_________________

Where sky and water meet,
Where the waves grow sweet,
Doubt not, Reepicheep,
To find all you seek,
There is the utter east.

Master Joined: 22 Mar 2008 Posts: 599

Human behaviour doesn't change that much, it's just how it is represented in public. Like in songs.

Just look at the private lives of Frank Sinatra and Bing Crosby. In reality, those lives weren't all that different from entertainment industry's current stars , but what could be told and shown of them was, so that part stayed private until the eventual bitter memoirs of family, friends and critical autobiographies, followed by documents etc.

Same with lyrics in songs. It's still the same human behaviour that they are tied into, they just can be shown more openly, instead of hidden deeper. Yet they are still, in the end, connecting to similar feelings.

To put it bluntly, if a Victorian gentleman blushed when seeing a lady's bare ankle, he wasn't still after the ankle but the same things which in current culture would be expressed more openly.

Human behaviour may or may not change that much, but human expectation does. A Victorian gentleman was expected to blush at a ladie's ankle but now he's not expected to care if a most ofa girl's legs are showing. Because of that expectation, humanity, at the very least, stives to be more chaste than they are, now they couldn't care less.
_________________

Where sky and water meet,
Where the waves grow sweet,
Doubt not, Reepicheep,
To find all you seek,
There is the utter east.

Page 2 of 2		All times are GMT - 5 Hours Goto page Previous 1, 2